CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS

  • December 31, 2015, 09:55:09 AM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10

Author Topic: Spending more on an amp then headphones  (Read 6514 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DubiousMike

  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Powder Monkey
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +12/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 85
  • (Posts as skeptic on HF)
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #20 on: September 22, 2015, 07:19:53 PM »

Pretty much this

The O2 is a very very good amp to use when trying to find your "one", to make sure the upstream equipment isn't interfering with the experience; IME the O2 is very very well behaved with a large variety of loads and it's also dirt cheap, even if it isn't capable of getting something to it's best it'll still be listenable


To put my below comments in perspective, I have had a self built O2 sitting on my bedside table for years now (to which I later added agdr's booster circuit and the recommended lme49990's in the gain stage) - so I have a fair appreciation for what the O2 can do...  I think it is an amp worth owning (and definitely worth building as a diy instruction method) for many headphone enthusiasts given the price and transportability.  That said, I can't agree with the proposition that it is the right amp to use to sample various headphones and select your preferred transducers. 

To me, the O2 simply sounds lousy with Senn hd650's and hd800's (my two favorites in my collection), compared to how it sound with, for example, fostex mods or even dt880 250 ohm's.  The O2 actually focuses the sort of diffuse signature of the dt880's in a way that works well for me.  Whereas it collapses the already coherent sound of the Senn's into something compressed, disinteresting and thin, at least as I hear it.  I would have sold my Senn's and never looked back if this was what I used to evaluate them. 

I don't know whether this is a ~1ohm output impedance issue, a global negative feedback/non-linear distortion issue, or something else entirely, but the headphone outs on either of my HTR's (5 year old Marantz or super basic 15 year old HTiB Yammy) seem to me to give a more even handed presentation to all of my headphones across the board for evaluation purposes.  Add a good low'ish impedance transformer coupled tube amp to the equation, and the Senns are suddenly in another league from the others, as I hear them.     

Logged

velvetx

  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Powder Monkey
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +6/-4
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 65
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #21 on: September 22, 2015, 07:20:55 PM »

Why would Sennheiser develop a proper HD650 successor with the best sound they could possibly put into a 500$ package and sell that to Europeans/Americans when they might as well produce a 3000$ unit with the same sound quality and sell to people for whom even that amount warrants no overnight consideration?

Because they are Sennheiser and not Stax.  I mean if to get into the audiophile game you needed a minimum of say $5,000 that would be such a turn off for most people I think.  With the economy of scale you buy a $3,000 pair of headphones how much you think an amp and dac are going to cost?
Logged

velvetx

  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Powder Monkey
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +6/-4
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 65
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #22 on: September 22, 2015, 07:22:29 PM »

I should add that I don't see any reason why a $500 headphone can't sound as good as a $5000 headphone in principle.

It's just two small drivers and a bit of plastic/metal. Once you get it down pat how expensive can it really be?

Additional price drivers will be cosmetics, etc.

Agreed.  You can always be like the legend Bob Katz and use the EQ to help with the perfect set of headphones for the perfect listening experience (I mean ultimately that is what it's for right?)(obviously subjectively speaking here).
Logged

Psalmanazar

  • Powder Monkey
  • *
  • Brownie Points: +12/-4
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #23 on: September 22, 2015, 08:12:51 PM »

Easy as hell. Headphones pretty much do stop at about $500 (HD 600/650 and the Paradox) with regards to overall tonality. Most of the $1000+ flagships are actually worse in many ways despite being better in other. If you're a consumer who just wants to take it out of the box, plug it into an amp and rock you don't want to worry about shoddy quality control, hot treble, wonky mids, or offensive resonances that need modding to go away it's very hard to really recommend most of the more expensive headphones. People shouldn't have to heavily equalize or have upstream gear that smooths out the high end just because a headphone was voiced by someone with high frequency hearing loss to have treble that sounds sparkly and detailed for ten minutes in the store but is painful for two hours of listening to well produced recordings at 80-90 decibels. The sparkly treble spikes of false detail lovers should be force stand next to a snare drum being bashed with ear horns.

Add to that the perpetual fuck up overpriced "TOTL" manufacturers like Audeze, John Grado, Harman, and Beyerdynamic. Beyerdynamic has been falling down the stairs for decades. The DT 880 can't even stand with the HD 600. It's not a HD 580 competitor; it's a god damn HD 540 one. Beyer doesn't really have anything better as they've spent the past 30 years biting on cyanide capsules and shooting themselves repeatedly in the face.

So yeah very easy to spend more on DACs and amps than on a pair of HD 6XX/800 cans. You can even do it with STAX electrostats very easily.
Logged

cspirou

  • Powder Monkey
  • *
  • Brownie Points: +3/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #24 on: September 22, 2015, 09:00:38 PM »

So the general feel I am getting is that while you can get a good amp for not a lot of money, squeezing the last 0.001% out of an amp is going to cost more then squeezing 0.001% out of headphones. Which makes sense to me because amps can have additional components like voltage regulators, constant current sources, balanced operation, etc. Headphones don't really get more components as they improve, it's more of a refinement process.

I should add that I don't see any reason why a $500 headphone can't sound as good as a $5000 headphone in principle.

It's just two small drivers and a bit of plastic/metal. Once you get it down pat how expensive can it really be?

Additional price drivers will be cosmetics, etc.

That reminds me of Sony Playstation 1 and its reputation as an audiophile CD player. When it was new the Playstation was relatively cheap at $250 and sold 250 million units. With those kind of numbers, Sony can afford to put more engineering in their CD player than the typical audio company and get something that performs well. If Sennheiser could sell 10 million I am sure the HD 650 can drop to a sub-$200 price.
Logged

Armaegis

  • Uphill, both ways
  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Pirate
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +76/-3
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 883
  • metallurgist, rocket scientist, swing dancer
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #25 on: September 22, 2015, 09:15:19 PM »

That reminds me of Sony Playstation 1 and its reputation as an audiophile CD player.

Hasn't this been thoroughly debunked over the years?
Logged
Do you think there may be an acoustic leak from the jack hole? ~Tyll Hertsens

Not sure if I like stuffing one hole or both holes. Tending toward one hole since both holes seems kinda ghey ~Purrin

Anaxilus

  • Phallus Belligerantus Analmorticus
  • Pirate
  • **
  • Brownie Points: +65535/-65535
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3493
  • TRS jacks must die
    • The Claw
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #26 on: September 22, 2015, 09:56:49 PM »

Hasn't this been thoroughly debunked over the years?

Yup. Trusted ears and gears found it measured and sounded worse than the hype. My 'theory' was that because it was warm sounding, it made those early lean and analytical CD's sound 'better' or more 'natural'. I never found any talking about super precise the imaging was or how it was hyper clear and transparent. Nope.
Logged
"If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading." - Lao Tzu

"The Claw is our master. The Claw chooses who will go or who will stay." - The LGM Community

"You're like a dull knife, just ain't cuttin'. Talking loud, saying nothing." - James Brown

ohhgourami

  • Bad at NDAs
  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Pirate
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +129/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #27 on: September 22, 2015, 10:47:44 PM »

Definitely.. and forget such thing as "best headphone of the world" .. that does not exist.

There's only "personal preferred headphone for me and the music/recordings I listen to" . understanding there's no "world champion" headphone  is the best way to enjoy happily this hobby .
Too bad Music Alchemist won't accept this...
Logged

Koloth

  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Powder Monkey
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +13/-6
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Can I haz square waves?
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2015, 12:39:53 AM »

Because there's 10,000 times more people willing to shell out $500 than $3000 for a pair of headphones. And similarly 10,000x more people willing to shell out $100 than $500. Assuming general population gets a glimpse of good sound and like it (may be a tall order, but more and more likely all the time with headphones) they'll spend as much on headphones as a good pair of shoes or handbag. Common prices there hoover around $100-$300. If the public demand gets high enough, competitive price pressures should lower prices/improve quality.

Your thinking is very reasonable on this point and I'd like to agree with you. If I remember correctly you posted something along those lines on Innerfidelity a while ago: About the Beats-craze being ultimately beneficial to high-fidelity audio because it got masses of people interested in headphones and willing to spend money on them. Sort of like an entry drug. I can see that, but I'm also sceptical: The reasons people buy Beats are often speculated upon, but they seem to be mostly a mixture of 1.) celebrity branding, 2.) fashion statement (if all the cool kids have it, who are you to walk around with a bland ol'Senn?) 3.) the 'idea of BASS'. Neither of those make it seem likely that the Beats demographic will in numbers upgrade to AKG K7** or Senn HD6** or what have you. In fact I would argue that the very product strategies we have seen from AKG and Sennheiser in the last years indicated their own market research and thinking on the subject: Build good (but not excellent) portable phones that are very fashionable to look at and come with a somewhat pronounced bass response as direct competitors or logical upgrades to the Beats lineup, sometimes with celebrity branding (AKG with all their Tiesto, Quincy Jones etc lines; Sennheiser with their horribly mistaken Adidas branding), sometimes without. None of this competitive focus has however extended to the open circumaural home headphone segment - the traditional concern of audiophiles. If established headphone manufacturers with market and demographics research departements and all that business stuff thought there were a lot of Beats-buyers out there that can be converted to hifi sound at home, surely we would see them release a number of products designed for just such a person: A well designed (both with regards to sound quality and to styling) open-back headphone for home use not more expensive than 500$. So let's see what the big names of the industry have to offer:

Sennheiser: If Sennheiser believed all those Beats buyers were actually audiophiles in the making surely they would have released great new "mid-fi" products to replace the amazing but long-in-the-tooth HD600 and HD650. Alas they did not: The HD700 is considerably more expensive and tuned quite... peculiarly, and the HD800 is >1000$. 0 interesting products for our hypothetical Beats convert interested in the best possible sound out of an open circumaural headphone for home at 500$.

AKG - It only looks a little brighter for AKG whose modus operandi has been the continued rehashing of the K7**-line - and the introduction of the even more retardedly (compared to the HD800) priced K812. Still they seem to be the only company actively trying to gain favor with the Beats crowd by aggressively adopting celebrity branding (Q701) and Beats-inspired-styling (N90Q). Lets see how that works for them.

Beyerdynamic? - Their home offerings consist of the T90 (obviously not targeted at Beats-converts, either with regards to styling nor to sound tuning) and the T1 (>800$). A true successor to the DT880 is still missing. 0 interesting products for our hypothetical Beats convert interested in the best possible sound out of an open circumaural headphone for home at 500$.

Ultrasone? - Not that they have ever been that great, but they have seemingly completely abandoned the open headphone market, going for ever more expensive, luxurious and bad sounding closed portable headphones (The Edition series, the Performance series etc.).

Grado? - Give me a break. You'd have to go back to the last century if you wanted to find any noteworthy change in their product design. And selling their products to Beats-converts is lets just say a challenging proposition. 0 interesting products for our hypothetical Beats convert interested in the best possible sound out of an open circumaural headphone for home at 500$.

Sony? - Was the SA5000 actually the last open headphone they built?!!! Their product lineup is very mobile-centric as well, with the Z7 being the sole exception. And while I enjoy the Z7 a lot it is clearly not pushing the boundaries of technical proficiency but is still way outside the budget for our hypothetical Beats convert. 0 interesting products for our hypothetical Beats convert interested in the best possible sound out of an open circumaural headphone for home at 500$.

Audio Technica? - Same old same old. Fancy closed woodies for the audiophiles with lots of disposable income, closed portable cans for the rest. Oh and gaming headsets. Thats new... They have the open-back AD-lineup which is said to be reasonably good. I dont know how long ago those were last updated, clearly they are not a point of focus for the company.

Pioneer? - Lots of crappy closed portable and "DJ"-headphones. And the open flagship SE-Master1 for >2500$! 0 interesting products for our hypothetical Beats convert interested in the best possible sound out of an open circumaural headphone for home at 500$.

Audeze? - Well the open-back EL-8 might qualify. Its a new design, open-back, with a focus on styling and elegance. But at 700$ its also quite steep for our hypothetical Beats convert.

Hifiman? - The 400i checks all the boxes (open-back, price range, focus on sound quality), but I dont get the feeling that it's been designed to win favor with the Beats-crowd.

Oppo? - In the same boat as Audeze: The PM2 would qualify in every respect except that the price is a bit too steep.

Philips - Well, hey now there is something! The Fidelio line is well designed both with regard to sound-quality and styling and fits into our desired price point! Yay for Philips!

Did I forget any noteworthy manufacturers?... Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is clear:
If headphone manufacturers (especially the big ones with departements doing market research etc) really thought that the Beats customers were audiophiles in the making ready and willing to be converted to high-quality open-back home headphones, surely we would see a lot of activity in that product segment. The exact opposite is the case. For people looking so get the best sound out of an open-back headphone for home use the options today are the same as they were 10 years ago: The Sennheiser HD600/650, the AKG K701 or the Beyerdynamic DT880(/T90). On the other hand we see tons of fashionable closed sets for portable use with mediocre to good soundquality: It seems to me that the manufacturers themselves have quite clear a perspective on the Beats-crowd. Judging from their product launches and development focus in the last 5 years only Philips seems to be interested in building fresh products for home use not over 500$. Let's pray to god their efforts pay off and other manufacturers follow suit.


Instead I feel like the manufacturers have adopted the following strategy:
Release great sounding and technically proficient headphones for audiophiles at retarded prices (>1000$) and use a tiny little bit of trickle down technology to build numerous stylish closed and portable headphones to compete with Beats headphone s. The 200-600$ home hifi market - formerly the place where flagships lived - seems to have been largely abandoned. Oh... I do hope that I'm wrong and you're right, Tyll...
Logged

anetode

  • an objectivist trapped in a subjectivist's body
  • Mate
  • Pirate
  • ****
  • Brownie Points: +178/-7
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1067
Re: Spending more on an amp then headphones
« Reply #29 on: September 23, 2015, 12:47:05 AM »

For those just starting in the hobby, I tell them to spend to the 1:2:3 ratio, for dac:amp:transducer respectively.

Not picking on you specifically, Armaegis, but these ratios are precisely the source of all bullshit markups. It's a great sales tactic to propose a ratio to someone - "you'd spend a thousand dollars on a headphone, why skimp on the cables [even if the differences are minor, not at all guaranteed and quite possibly illusory]?" Likewise for DACs/amps, the mantra of "source first", "crap in - crap out", and so on. Surely even Tyll would agree that choosing to offer headphone amplifiers greatly enhanced his business and lessened his reliance on outside distributors.

Alternately, when you attend meets or conventions/trade shows, consider that the cost of displaying products is split by the distributors/manufacturers, so of course you'd want an amplifier or cable company which makes products in a similar price bracket to your headphones/speakers - they could afford to pitch in more. After all, if you sell someone on your headphone it costs you nothing to put a good word in for your business associate. Also if someone doesn't happen to like the sound then you can always blame it on the partnering gear - "oh, that's because that was our first time teaming up with this DAC manufacturer and we didn't know that our products were an unsynergistic match, come buy and listen to our booth now that MSB brought out the bigguns!"

Some people are also simply obsessed with power. Bigger is better for them whether you're talking about amps, cars or guns. Don't forget geeks who are enamored by exotic technology and gladly pay extra for interesting designs endorsed by engineering gurus. All the while those gurus themselves are thankful for the chance to build outrageously uneconomical designs because of such demand. I know that if I was making products that an elegant or aesthetic design would be way more fun to work on than a budget one. Then again I also wouldn't necessarily offer the most neutral opinion on which product to go for in my lineup.

So yeah, I'm more cynical about the profit motive / gadget fetish side of things than even the objective/subjective differences. Not sure how this translates into viable advice though, since audiophilia is a very pleasant affliction for many. Follow your heart while being mindful of your wallet, or some shit.
Logged
Love isn't always on time.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10